Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Solimar (2022/0346320, cited by applicant, “X” reference).
It should be noted that the recitation “for," "so that …," "configured to” etc. is considered as merely an intended use. Applicants attention is drawn to MPEP 2111.02 which states that intended use statements must be evaluated to determine whether the intended use results in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art. Only if such structural difference exists, does the recitation serve to limit the claim. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Since it is the language itself of the claims which must particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention, without limitations imported from the specification, whether such language is couched in terms of means plus function or consists of a detailed recitation of the inventive matter. Limitations in the specification not included in the claim may not be relied upon to impart patentability to an otherwise unpatentable claim. In re Lundberg, 113 USPQ 530 (CCPA 1957).
[AltContent: textbox (Drive train driven by the rotor includes: a drive coupled to the rotor)]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Axis of the roll)][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (Drive shaft parallel to the axis of the roll & mechanical connection)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
314
576
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Feed roll/beater projections )][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image2.png
346
486
media_image2.png
Greyscale
1. A threshing apparatus comprising:
a conveyor for transferring harvested crop in a direction (elevator 24);
at least one threshing rotor for receiving harvested crop from the conveyor for separating grain material, the at least one threshing rotor driven for rotation about an axis (28-1 or 28-2);
a feed roll interposed between the conveyor and the at least one threshing rotor, the feed roll rotatable about an axis at a right angle to the axis of rotation of the threshing rotor, the feed roll comprising a plurality of projections (marked up) configured to feed the harvested crop from the conveyor to the at least one threshing rotor and to knock out stones from the harvested crop (feed beater 30); and
a drive train connected to and driven by the threshing rotor (marked up), the drive train comprising:
a drive coupled to the at least one threshing rotor (marked up),
a drive shaft parallel to the axis of rotation of the feed roll (marked up); and
a mechanical connection (bevel gears 96, 110 or meshed gears 114, 116; or alternate belt or chain taught in par. 52) between the drive shaft and the feed roll so that the feed roll is driven in synchronism with the rotation of the at least one threshing rotor (intended use is taught in par. 53).
2. The threshing apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one threshing rotor is driven from its rearward end and the drive train is connected to a front of the at least one threshing rotor (shown above).
3. The threshing apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one threshing rotor is a pair of threshing rotors, one rotor of which is connected to the drive train to drive the feed roll (figs 5, 7, 8).
4. The threshing apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the drive is positioned above the axis of the at least one threshing rotor (arrangement is best shown in fig 5, similar to the arrangement of the 1st bevel gear at fig 6) and is coupled to the at least one threshing rotor through at least one of a universal drive and a gear set (fig 4).
5. The threshing apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the mechanical connection is a pair of pulleys respectively connected to an end of the drive shaft and the feed roll and a belt extending over the pulleys (alternate arrangement, par. 55; however, the choice is not critical, compare with cl. 6).
6. The threshing apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the mechanical connection is a gear set between an end of the shaft and the feed roll (fig 5).
7. An agricultural harvester comprising: a frame (fig 1); a power unit (engine, par. 55); and the threshing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one threshing rotor is driven from the power unit (par. 55).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form 892.
Barrelmeyer et al (WO 02/074063) an infeed roll (48) coupled to a separation rotor (24) drive (fig 2).
Takagi et al (JP 2022012790) similarly teaches a drive coupling (fig 4).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARPAD FABIAN-KOVACS whose telephone number is (571) 272-6990. The examiner can normally be reached Mo-Th.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Rocca can be reached on (571) 272-8971. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ARPAD FABIAN-KOVACS/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671